\ 


.  \  ^ 


f  r^r* 

l  •  Ct  'ili  i  .i.  w  •  ,  c  ‘  '  * 


c‘&U  Jufi 


f  ■;;: 


AMERICAN  BAPTIST  MISSIONARY  UNION 


REPORT  OF 

COMMITTEE  ON 
HOME  EXPENSE 

APPOINTED  BY  BOARD  OF  MANAGERS 
AT  OKLAHOMA,  MAY  26,  1908 


FORD  BUILDING,  BOSTON,  MASS 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Columbia  University  Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/reportofcommitte00amer_17 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE 
ON  HOME  EXPENSE 


Portland,  Oregon,  June  27,  1909. 

To  the  Board  of  Managers  of  the  American  Baptist  Missionary 
Union: 

Your  Committee  appointed  to  “  consider  the  whole  question 
of  Home  Expense,  especially  with  reference  to  expenses  at  the 
Rooms,”  respectfully  reports: 

As  soon  as  possible  after  receiving  notice  of  our  appointment 
an  organization  was  effected  by  the  choice  of  Charles  C.  Barry  as 
Chairman  and  W.  D.  Chamberlin  as  Secretary. 

The  task  assigned  to  us  was  found  to  be  so  stupendous  that 
it  was  decided  by  unanimous  vote  to  engage  the  services  of  com¬ 
petent  Public  Accountants,  accustomed  to  the  examination  of 
accounts,  and  of  the  details  of  Administrative  Expenditures  in 
organizations  similar  to  the  American  Baptist  Missionary  Union, 
and  report  to  us  their  findings. 

The  Committee  was  very  fortunate  in  securing  the  same 
Public  Accountants  and  Auditors,  Messrs.  Harvey  S.  Chase  &  Com¬ 
pany,  whom  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Northern  Baptist  Con¬ 
vention  had  engaged  to  report  to  them  on  the  Accounts  and 
Investments  of  the  Missionary  Union  preparatory  to  the  adoption 
of  the  Budget  for  1909-10. 

The  Committee  is  also  indebted  to  Mr.  F.  D.  Phinney  of  our 
Mission  Press  in  Rangoon,  now  at  home  on  furlough,  who  prepared 
with  great  care  and  accuracy  a  tabulation  and  comparison  of  the 
expenditures  of  the  Union  with  those  of  other  Missionary  Societies 
doing  similar  work. 

These  reports  covering  the  period  of  ten  years  from  1900  to 
1909  inclusive,  give  an  accurate  statement  of  the  affairs  of  the 
American  Baptist  Missionary  Union,  so  far  as  Home  Expense  and 
management  is  concerned,  and  constitute  a  volume  of  admirably 
arranged  facts,  suggestions  and  recommendations  which  acted 
upon  will  promote  greater  economy  and  efficiency. 

We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  rents  paid  in  Boston  and  the 
space  occupied  by  the  offices  and  clerical  force  are  no  greater  than 
is  required  for  economical  service.  We  find  that  the  removal 
of  the  offices  from  Tremont  Temple  was  inevitable  and  unavoidable 
because  the  room  needed  by  the  Union  could  not  be  provided  in  the 
building  and  the  rooms  available  made  it  necessary  to  use  electric 
light  in  the  daytime  at  great  additional  expense.  The  new  lease 

3 


in  the  Ford  Building  is  at  a  lower  rental  per  square  foot  than  in  any 
other  available  location  and  we  find  that  it  can  be  re-leased  or 
sub-let  when  desired  at  a  bonus  over  the  terms  of  the  present  lease. 

The  reason  for  the  increase  in  rented  space  is  due  chiefly  to 
the  necessity  for  accommodations  for  the  shipping  department, 
which  for  years  was  in  such  quarters  that  the  business  could  not  be 
attended  to  without  creating  a  public  nuisance  by  the  unlawful 
use  of  the  corridors  and  streets. 

We  find  that  the  clerical  salaries  are  as  low  as  such  salaries 
ought  in  reason  to  be  fixed  and  that  careful  scrutiny  leads  us  to 
the  conclusion  that  prompt,  efficient  and  faithful  service  is  being 
given. 

We  find  that  the  increase  in  Home  Expense  in  the  last  five 
years  is  largely  due  to  the  purchase  of  equipment,  half  of  which 
might  reasonably  be  charged  to  material  on  hand  as  it  is  salable  as 
well  as  usable. 

Our  experts  report  that  the  office  equipment  is  up  to  date  and 
efficiently  used. 

We  find  that  the  expenditures  may  be  reduced  in  the  Literature 
Department  provided  the  proposed  consolidation  of  the  denomina¬ 
tional  missionary  magazines  is  effected,  and  in  the  District  Secre¬ 
tary’s  Department,  provided  there  is  a  division  of  labor  in  speaking 
tours  with  the  other  Secretaries  of  our  national  societies. 

We  find  that  the  Missionary  Union  requires  a  larger  force 
in  its  rooms  than  some  other  Missionary  Societies  so  long  as  it 
deals  directly  with  its  individual  Missions  and  Missionaries,  and  not, 
as  in  the  case  of  The  American  Board,  through  independent 
Mission  Stations  managing  and  disbursing  funds  and  having  accounts 
and  auditing  agencies  on  the  field.  Our  Treasurer  has  between 
1500  and  1600  open  accounts  with  Missions  and  Missionaries,  as 
compared  with  250  accounts  of  The  American  Board. 

We  are  glad  to  report  that  after  the  most  careful  search  by 
our  experts  we  are  unable  to  find  either  waste  or  extravagance  in 
any  department  of  the  Home  Administration. 

The  complete  report  of  the  Committee  including  the  report 
covering  the  exhaustive  examination  of  Expenses  and  Home 
Administration  by  Messrs.  Harvey  S.  Chase  &  Company,  with  care¬ 
fully  prepared  tables  and  schedules  covering  the  ten-year  period, 
has  been  printed  in  pamphlet  form  and  may  be  secured  upon 
request  by  addressing  The  Literature  Department,  Ford  Building 
Boston,  Mass. 


Charles  C.  Barry 
William  J.  Hobbs 
D.  G.  Garabrant 


W.  D.  Chamberlin 
William  H.  Waite 


Committee. 


4 


Harvey  S.  Chase  &  Company, 
Public  Accountants  &  Auditors, 
84  State  St.,  Boston. 


May  27,  1909. 

Messrs.  Charles  C.  Barry,  William  J.  Hobbs,  W.  D.  Chamberlin, 
D.  G.  Garabrant,  William  H.  Waite.*  Special  Committee  Appointed 
by  the  Board  of  Managers  of  the  American  Baptist  Missionary  Union 
on  '"Home  Expense." 

Gentlemen: — 


INTRODUCTION. 

While  making  the  examination  on  which  we  based  our  recent  report  to 
the  special  Finance  Committee  of  the  Northern  Baptist  Convention,  we 
constantly  had  in  mind  your  instructions  with  reference  to  a  report  on  Home 
Expense.  We  have  since  made  a  further  examination  of  the  available  ma¬ 
terial  relating  specially  to  this  subject,  and  can  now  report  as  follows : — 

The  more  we  have  studied  the  subject  of  Home  Expense,  the  more  we 
realize  the  difficulty  of  saying  the  last  word  in  regard  to  it.  An  examination 
of  the  annual  reports  of  the  Missionary  Union  shows  that  the  topic  has 
frequently  come  up  for  discussion  in  the  last  ten  years  and,  from  various 
magazine  articles  that  have  been  called  to  our  attention,  we  learn  that  other 
missionary  organizations  have  been  actively  discussing  the  same  questions. 
While  we  realize  the  desirability  from  every  point  of  view  of  reaching  some 
definite  conclusions,  it  seems  to  us  that  from  the  very  nature  of  the  topic,  it 
is  bound  to  be  a  recurring  subject  for  discussion  as  long  as  the  missionary 
societies  continue  with  their  work. 

Your  committee  is  confronted  with  a  three-fold  difficulty  in  making  any 
recommendation  to  your  constituency  on  the  subject  of  Home  Expense. 
First,  of  course,  you  will  recognize  the  impossibility  of  making  any  thoroughly 
satisfactory  definition  of  the  class  of  expenditure  under  discussion.  Most  of 
it  is  better  described  as  administrative  expense,  and,  as  has  been  pointed 
out  by  officials  of  the  American  Board,  as  well  as  in  the  Missionary  Union, 
is  such  an  indispensable  part  of  mission  administration  that  there  is  little 
real  meaning  in  setting  it  apart  from  numerous  other  outgoes  which  are 
ordinarily  referred  to  as  expenses  of  the  mission  field. 

Secondly,  it  is  almost,  if  not  quite,  as  impossible  to  establish  to  every¬ 
body’s  satisfaction  a  standard  by  which  the  mission  administration  and 
expenses  may  be  measured.  The  executive  officers  of  an  industrial  plant, 
which  is  organized  primarily  to  earn  dividends  for  its  stockholders,  can 
justify  almost  any  kind  of  expenses  which  they  incur  if,  year  after  year,  they 
show  substantial  profits  as  a  result  of  their  management,  and  no  doubt  there 
are  many  people  who  feel  that  successful  prosecution  of  mission  work 
including  the  business  of  raising  funds  and  distributing  them  to  the  mission 
field,  if  carried  on  without  financial  embarrassment,  might  be  taken  as  a 
complete  justification  of  the  policy  of  management  which  secured  these 


Mesf^rs  W.  A.  Grippin  and  W.  S.  Hubbell  were  also  appointed  bn  this  committee,  but  were  unable  to  serve. 

5 


results.  There  are  other  people,  however,  who  feel  that  standards  of  this 
kind  are  not  applicable  to  a  philanthropic  enterprise  and  that  expenses, 
which  would  of  necessity  be  approved  in  the  management  of  a  purely  com¬ 
mercial  enterprise,  cannot  be  approved  in  the  case  of  the  Missionary  Union. 
We  do  not  see  how  these  fundamental  differences  of  opinion  can  ever  be 
completely  reconciled,  and  it  appears  to  us  that  any  policy  which  may  be 
adopted  for  the  Union  must,  of  necessity,  represent  something  of  a  com¬ 
promise  between  these  diverse  views. 

The  third  difficulty  arises  when  an  attempt  is  made  to  compare  the 
expenses  of  the  Union  with  other  foreign  missionary  organizations.  Part  of 
this  difficulty  results  from  diversity  of  organization  in  the  different  mission¬ 
ary  societies.  It  has  been  pointed  out  by  other  critics  that  the  Presbyterians, 
for  example,  exercise  in  their  field  organizations  many  functions  which  the 
Missionary  Union  discharges  through  its  home  office.  The  Foreign  Missions 
Board  of  the  Southern  Baptist  Convention,  on  the  other  hand,  seems  to 
make  collections  without  any  organization  for  district  secretaries  similar  to 
that  maintained  by  the  Missionary  Union,  Finally,  a  comparison  with  other 
missionary  societies  is  rendered  extremely  difficult  and,  except  for  certain 
large  totals,  completely  impossible  by  the  lack  of  uniformity  in  the  several 
financial  reports.  We  think  it  would  undoubtedly  be  very  desirable,  from 
every  point  of  view,  if  the  different  missionary  societies  in  this  country,  who 
are  doing  work  similar  in  character,  should  agree  to  adopt  a  uniform  method 
of  accounting  for  income  and  outgo.  Such  a  plan  would  have  numerous 
advantages,  aside  from  the  matter  of  comparing  and  classifying  Home 
Expense,  and  something  of  this  kind  is  obviously  necessary  before  there  can 
be  any  satisfactory  comparison  of  expense  items  for  the  different  societies. 
This,  it  appears  to  us,  is  the  most  important  conclusion  reached  by  Mr.  F.  D. 
Phinney  in  his  excellent  report,  which  is  referred  to  more  at  length  in 
a  succeeding  paragraph. 

When  the  difficulty  of  making  comparisons  is  fully  realized,  any  com¬ 
ments  on  the  subject  of  Home  Expense,  or  other  administrative  work  of  the 
Union,  must,  we  think,  be  based  upon  a  direct  observation  of  the  particular 
work  in  hand,  drawing  conclusions  from  the  facts  as  they  appear  in  each  case. 
This  is  the  method  we  have  followed  in  preparing  the  report  for  your 
committee. 


THE  HOME  OFFICE 

With  this  extended  introduction,  we  may  call  attention  to  certain  facts 
we  have  observed  and  the  conclusions  which  we  think  may  be  based  thereon. 
Considering  first  the  home  office  of  the  Missionary  Union,  our  observation 
leads  us  to  the  conclusion  that,  on  the  whole,  it  is  well  organized  and  effi¬ 
ciently  administered. 

A  proper  departmental  division  is  essential  to  good  organization  in 
business  on  a  large  scale,  and  we  were  pleased  to  find  a  successful  application 
of  this  principle  in  the  office  of  the  Missionary  Union.  The  Literature 
Department,  the  Stenographic  Department,  and  the  Filing  Department  are 
distinct  units  in  the  office,  and,  as  organized,  are  in  excellent  shape  to  do 
efficient  work. 

Looking  beyond  the  outline  of  this  organization,  we  found  a  force  of 
intelligent  employees,  thoroughly  familiar  with  their  work.  We  examined 
the  schedule  of  wages  paid  and  found  the  rates  in  accord  with  the  general 
average  of  this  city,  for  work  of  this  class  among  considerate  employers. 

6 


We  gave  considerable  attention  to  the  actual  equipment  of  the  office 
in  the  way  of  filing  cases  and  office  furniture  generally.  In  our  opinion,  the 
equipment  has  been  wisely  selected  for  the  use  of  the  Union,  and  is  likely  to 
continue  in  service  for  a  long  time  to  come.  There  are  no  extravagant 
furnishings  in  any  of  the  rooms  and  all  the  equipment  is  in  constant  use. 

The  filing  system  is  a  most  important  feature  in  an  office  of  this  kind, 
and  the  arrangements  at  the  Union,  in  general,  must  be  highly  commended. 
Some  of  the  officials  still  make  use  of  press  copy  books  in  addition  to  carbon 
copies  for  letters.  This  makes  some  extra  work,  but  is  relatively  unim¬ 
portant.  We  believe  an  expert  study  of  the  filing  system  would  eliminate 
some  of  the  abstracting  now  done  in  correspondence.  The  present  methods, 
however,  appear  to  reach  satisfactory  results,  and  could  not  be  abandoned, 
except  with  loss  of  efficiency,  until  new  methods  had  been  installed.  Indeed, 
we  are  open  to  conviction  whether  it  would  prove  easier  to  continue  the 
abstracting  than  to  elaborate  the  present  filing  system. 

We  understand  that  there  has  been  criticism  of  the  large  outlay  made 
each  year  for  literature  in  various  forms.  The  magazine  especially  is  said  to 
be  too  expensive,  but,  as  plans  are  being  made  to  cut  down  this  expense  by 
combining  the  magazine  with  other  Baptist  periodicals,  it  does  not  seem 
necessary  for  us  to  make  further  comment  here.  We  note,  in  passing,  that 
advertisements  of  patent  medicines  and  other  matters  of  questionable 
nature  are  rigidly  excluded  from  the  pages  of  the  magazine.  We  commend 
this  policy,  which  is  the  only  one  that  a  self-respecting  periodical  ought  to 
follow,  and  mention  it  merely  to  point  out  one  reason  for  diminished  income 
when  comparisons  are  made  with  other  less  conscientious  periodicals. 

The  Union  spends  several  thousand  dollars  for  other  printing  which 
cannot  be  criticised  by  any  purely  commercial  standard.  If  it  is  to  be  done, 
there  should  be  due  care  to  get  as  favorable  prices  as  possible,  and  we  believe 
this  detail  is  well  looked  after.  A  printing  register  is  maintained  in  the  office ; 
at  least  two  competitive  bids  are  taken  on  nearly  all  jobs  and  usually  three  or 
more  on  any  large  order. 

The  stock  of  pamphlets  and  other  literature  is  kept  in  good  order,  and 
except  for  a  few  books  that  were  on  hand  in  rather  large  quantities,  did  not 
seem  to  be  in  excess  of  current  needs.  In  reply  to  our  suggestion  that  a  more 
careful  supervision  of  stocks  would  enable  the  literature  department  to  run 
with  a  smaller  investment  in  printed  matter,  we  were  informed  that  it  had 
already  been  planned  to  place  future  orders  for  similar  goods  on  a  different 
basis,  that  was  expected  to  keep  the  stock  at  a  minimum.  We  suggest 
further  that  literature  which  is  uniformly  sold,  and  never  given  away,  should 
be  put  in  a  class  by  itself  called  “  sale  goods,”  and  a  simple  account  kept  for 
it,  entirely  distinct  from  the  general  stock  (that  is  generally  given  away  or 
distributed  at  cost  and  almost  never  handled  at  a  profit). 

Much  of  the  present  practice  in  the  Secretaries’  offices  has  been 
developed,  so  we  were  informed,  within  the  last  few  years,  and  is  probably 
responsible  for  much  of  the  increased  expense  in  the  offices.  Beyond  the 
small  details  we  have  referred  to,  we  do  not  see  where  there  is  much  room 
for  curtailment  unless,  as  a  matter  of  policy,  the  Union  will  give  up  some  of 
the  things  it  is  now  doing.  We  do  not  have  any  comment  to  offer  in  this 
connection  except  that  for  every  detail  of  work  now  conducted  in  the  office, 
one  could  find  abundant  precedent  in  other  well-managed  business  offices. 
We  have  suggested  to  the  Home  Secretary  that  some  further  analysis  of 
clerical  wages  be  undertaken  during  the  coming  year,  and  should  this  be 
done,  there  will  probably  be  more  details  of  cost  available  for  criticism  in 
the  future. 


7 


In  our  report  to  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Northern  Baptist  Con¬ 
vention  on  the  finances  of  the  Union  and  related  matters,  we  pointed  out 
several  opportunities  for  revision  and  improvement  in  the  accounting  practice 
in  the  Treasurer’s  office.  It  is  not  to  be  expected,  however,  that  the  volume 
of  work  in  this  department  could  be  greatly  decreased  by  the  proposed 
reforms,  which  would  be  in  the  direction  of  better  and  more  efficient  work 
rather  than  immediate  economy. 


DISTRICT  SECRETARIES 

Outside  the  home  office  the  Union  spent  last  year  $44,576.65  for  the 
District  Secretaries  and  their  organization.  Our  attention  has  been  called  to 
criticisms  of  these  expenses,  but  as  the  extension  or  curtailment  of  this  work 
must  be  settled  as  a  matter  of  policy,  we  do  not  see  any  reason  for  repeating 
here  the  arguments  we  have  heard  pro  and  con  on  this  subject. 

One  comment  has  occurred  to  us,  however,  which  we  have  not  heard 
advanced  by  others,  namely,  that  since  the  Union  stands  committed  to 
extensive  expenditures  on  the  mission  field,  it  is  only  sound  and  prudent 
business  management  to  maintain  an  efficient  collecting  agency  at  home 
which  shall  provide  a  continuous  supply  of  funds  to  meet  these  obligations. 
If  the  needed  funds  cannot  be  obtained  without  persistent  solicitation,  it 
would  be  equally  logical  to  restrict  the  field  of  operations  of  the  Union  to 
what  the  unsolicited  contributions  will  pay  for.  Any  intelligent  criticism  in 
this  direction  must  take  account  of  the  character  of  the  Union’s  field  work. 
It  cannot  be  effectively  curtailed  at  short  notice,  as  it  costs  about  as  much  to 
bring  a  missionary  home  as  to  maintain  him  in  the  field  the  same  year.  This 
phase  of  the  society’s  business  illustrates  the  difficulty  of  applying  a  rigid 
standard  that  will  satisfy  everybody,  and  the  obvious  need  of  compromise  in 
arriving  at  conclusions. 

r  OTHER  ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENSE 

In  the  course  of  our  inquiries  about  administrative  expense,  our  atten¬ 
tion  was  called  to  the  recent  appointments  of  general  missionaries  to  travel 
and  supervise  or  inspect  the  actual  work  on  the  mission  fields.  We  have 
also  heard  criticism  of  the  Foreign  Secretary’s  recent  visit  to  the  mission 
fields.  We  have  no  opinion  to  express  about  the  direct  purpose  of  either  of 
these  undertakings,  but  we  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  similar  broad, 
supervisory  work  is  generally  approved  in  large  business  enterprises  with 
scattered  interests,  and,  prima  facie,  ought  to  be  of  great  advantage  to  the 
Missionary  Union. 

COMPARISON  WITH  OTHER  SOCIETIES 

In  our  letter  of  instructions,  special  reference  was  made  to  the  report  of 
Mr.  F.  D.  Phinney,  comparing  the  expenses  of  the  Missionary  Union  with 
other  societies.  We  have  made  a  careful  study  of  this  report,  and,  as  stated 
in  our  introduction,  we  must  conclude  that  its  principal  importance  consists 
in  showing  the  difficulty  of  comparing  one  missionary  society  with  another, 
except  in  the  most  general  way. 

This  difficulty  is  stated  very  clearly  by  Mr.  Phinney,  when  he  says :  "  It 
would  be  instructive,  if  it  were  possible,  to  tabulate  all  these  reports,  setting 
similar  items  to  similar  items  for  every  dollar  of  expenditure;  but  this  is 
utterly  impossible  *  *  xhe  only  plan  possible  to  follow  is  to  gather 

8 


groups  of  items  together  along  main  lines,  making  these  groups  so  large  that 
they  can  be  determined  from  almost  all  of  the  reports.” 

We  cannot  escape  the  conclusion,  after  our  review  of  Mr.  Phinney’s 
tables  and  text,  that  he  reached  the  further  conclusion  that  the  attempted 
comparisons  with  other  missionary  societies  were  for  one  reason  or  another 
of  little  value  to  the  Missionary  Union.  In  every  case  the  report  calls 
attention  to  differences  in  conditions  in  accounting  practice  which  render 
exact  comparison  between  the  societies  impossible.  This  is  shown  very 
clearly  in  Mr.  Phinney’s  conclusion  (Paragraph  C),  which  reads  as  follows : 

”  C.  With  reference  to  the  Societies  which  appear  to  be  more  econom¬ 
ically  managed  than  the  Union,  it  is  true  of  all  that  their  figures  do  not 
represent  the  full  cost  of  management,  either  because  certain  collecting  work 
is  done  for  them  without  expense  in  ways  in  which  it  is  not  possible  for  the 
Union  to  follow  their  procedure,  or  a  great  apparent  saving  in  cost  of  man¬ 
agement  is  apparent  but  not  actual,  since  much  administrative  work  is  done 
on  the  foreign  field  instead  of  in  the  home  offices,  and  no  account  of  its  true 
cost  appears  in  the  financial  reports  of  such  societies.” 

We  heartily  concur  with  the  two  recommendations  with  which  Mr. 
Phinney  closes  his  report  (Paragraphs  D  and  E).  First,  that  a  carefully 
considered  classification  of  expenses  should  be  adopted  and  followed  in  fu¬ 
ture  accounts  of  the  Union.  If  administrative  expenses  are  transferred  from 
the  home  office  to  the  foreign  field,  we  fully  agree  with  Mr.  Phinney,  it 
should  not  be  lost  sight  of  by  merging  with  the  so-called  “  general  foreign 
work  supposedly  missionary  in  its  character  and  not  administrative.” 

Secondly,  it  would  be  a  great  advance  for  all  missionary  societies  if  a 
uniform  system  could  be  adopted  for  their  several  accounts.  This  principle 
is  finding  wider  and  wider  application  every  year.  Railroads,  banks  and 
municipal  enterprises  can  be  considered  intelligently  only  when  substantially 
uniform  reports  are  rendered  to  the  public  and  similar  items  have  the  same 
meaning  in  all  cases.  This  critical,  definite  knowledge  will,  we  believe,  be 
demanded  by  denominational  constituencies  in  the  not  distant  future  and 
every  society  that  now  has  any  active  interest  in  the  subject  seems  to  have 
an  excellent  opportunity  to  serve  its  own  interest  by  giving  hearty  support 
to  the  movement. 

COMPARATIVE  STATISTICS  FOR  THE  UNION 

Accepting,  then,  the  impossibility  of  making  any  really  satisfactory  or 
conclusive  comparison  with  other  societies,  as  their  accounts  are  now  stated, 
we  turn  to  a  study  of  the  Union’s  figures  over  a  series  of  years.  Here  we 
think  there  is  something  to  be  gained  by  making  a  comparison  slightly 
different  and  more  extended  than  the  one  Mr.  Phinney  set  up  between  the 
year  1900  and  the  year  1908.  Such  a  comparison  between  two  years  widely 
separated  does  not  show  what  the  trend  has  been  during  the  interval,  or  what 
it  is  today.  One  must  see  the  figures  for  a  series  of  years,  we  think,  to  draw 
any  safe  conclusions.  We  have  therefore  prepared  several  summaries  relat¬ 
ing  to  Income  and  Outgo  for  ten  years,  1900  to  1909  inclusive.  The  figures 
in  these  schedules  have  been  copied  from  the  Treasurer’s  annual  reports, 
following  an  arrangement  of  our  own. 

Schedule  A  shows  classified  income  for  the  ten  years,  and  has  been 
arranged  to  show  the  main  streams  of  revenue,  and  to  throw  the  smaller 
unclassified  items  each  year  into  a  miscellaneous  account  which  we  have 
called  "  Other  Income.” 

Schedule  B  shows  this  revenue  in  one  lump  sum  each  year  and,  in  com- 

9 


parison,  classified  outgo  for  each  year.  We  arranged  this  schedule  to  show 
very  clearly  the  distinction  between  the  actual  running  expense  and  the 
disbursements  to  annuitants,  sometimes  erroneously  included  in  Adminis¬ 
trative  or  Home  Expense.  Mr.  Phinney  very  properly  insisted  on  this 
distinction,  but  we  can  hardly  concur  in  his  comment  that  it  is  therefore 
proper  to  omit  the  income  derived  from  investing  the  principal  of  these 
conditional  gifts  from  the  “  Total  Income  ”  in  making  comparative  state¬ 
ments  and  percentage  calculations  of  the  Union’s  business  from  year  to  year- 
We  cannot  see  any  important  distinction  between  this  income  and  that 
received  from  investing  permanent  funds  It  is  easy  to  see  how  the  wrong 
impression  was  obtained  from  the  practice  at  the  Union  of  accounting  for 
income  on  every  fund  or  bond  separately.  As  we  pointed  out  in  our  report 
to  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Northern  Baptist  Convention,  this  account¬ 
ing  practice  puts  the  emphasis  in  the  wrong  place,  in  our  judgment,  and  the 
futility  of  attempting  this  kind  of  a  classification  will  at  once  be  apparent 
when  the  simpler,  more  direct  practice  we  have  recommended  is  set  up  at  the 
Union. 

There  was  a  similar  error,  we  think,  in  excluding  disbursements  to 
annuitants  from  the  “  Total  Expenditure,”  as  set  up  on  Mr.  Phinney ’s  table. 
While  no  direct  comparison  can  be  made  between  disbursements  to  different 
classes  of  persons,  it  seems  obvious  that  paying  these  annuitants  regularly 
and  accurately  is  quite  an  important  part  of  the  total  disbursing  business  in 
the  Treasurer’s  office. 

Total  Income  and  Total  Outgo,  on  our  schedule,  therefore,  may  be 
taken  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  words.  These  totals  do  not  include  the  gifts 
to  increase  permanent  funds  or  in  consideration  for  annuity  payments. 
These  amounts  are  properly  excluded  as  they  are  not  current  revenues  and 
cannot  properly  be  used  to  pay  for  current  missionary  work  or  current 
administration  expenses. 

Schedule  C.  Having  explained  how  the  totals  are  made  up,  we  ask 
your  attention  to  the  comparison  of  ratios  for  the  various  items  from  year 
to  year.  The  percentages  we  have  calculated  are,  in  each  case,  intended  to 
answer  the  different  kinds  of  inquiry  or  criticism  that  are  directed  at  the 
administrative  expense  of  the  Union.  First,  this  item  is  compared  with  the 
total  volume  of  the  Union’s  business.  The  ratio  of  expense  to  total  income 
and  total  outgo  is  shown  in  the  first  and  second  rows  of  figures. 

As  there  may  be  some  relation  between  systematic  education  of  pros¬ 
pective  donors  and  the  actual  donations  received  (reflected  in  greater  admin¬ 
istrative  expense)  we  have  next  compared  the  expenses  with  the  annual 
totals  of  Donations,  Legacies  and  the  miscellaneous  ”  Other  Income.”  In 
one  sense,  the  main  concern  of  the  Union  is  to  inspire  gifts  (of  money  and 
men)  for  missions.  It  maintains  secretaries,  distributes  literature,  and 
incurs  other  expenses  with  this  end  in  view.  The  effectiveness  of  this  work 
as  shown  by  the  recruits  of  devoted  missionaries  cannot  be  measured  by 
statistics  alone,  but  the  receipts  of  money  can  be  compared  one  year  with 
another,  and  with  the  running  expenses  of  the  business.  The  results  are  set 
down  in  the  third  row  of  percentages. 

But  obviously,  much  weight  must  be  given  to  the  view  that  the  main 
business  of  the  Union  is,  after  all,  missions,  for  which  all  the  machinery  is 
run  and  for  which  ultimately  all  the  expenditure  is  made.  The  percentage 
of  home  or  administrative  expense  to  the  appropriations  for  missions  is  shown 
in  the  fourth  row  of  figures. 

We  believe  that  any  one  interested  in  the  work  of  the  Union  will  find  it 

10 


worth  while  to  study  these  cost  percentages  carefully.  Looking  from  the 
ratios  to  the  figures  from  which  they  are  made  up,  the  factors  in  each  fluctua¬ 
tion  can  be  traced,  and  one  can  see  the  reasons  for  the  variation  from  year 
to  year.  Varying  degrees  of  importance  will  be  attached  to  the  different 
calculations,  according  as  one  puts  emphasis  on  one  point  of  view  or  another. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  the  high  ratios  of  the  year  1905  when  the  expense 
increased  $13,000,  while  income  fell  off  slightly  and  work  appropriations 
remained  practically  stationary.  In  making  comparative  ratios  when  the 
fluctuations  are  within  such  narrow  limits,  the  calculations  should  always  be 
carried  to  four  decimal  places.  Calculations  in  less  detail  are  not  nearly  so 
serviceable  in  showing  the  actual  trend  of  the  various  factors  from  year  to 
year. 

Returning  to  the  specific  subject  of  this  report,  it  must  be  observed 
that  the  total  administrative  or  home  expense  has  steadily  increased  since 
1900.  The  burden  of  interest  on  borrowed  money  shows  up  with  striking 
effect  at  the  end  of  the  decade  as  the  increasing  deficits  had  to  be  financed 
each  year.  Of  the  four  main  items,  the  notable  increase  has  been  for  “General 
Expense.”  As  the  size  of  this  item  and  the  variety  of  sub-accounts  seemed 
to  justify  a  more  complete  analysis,  we  have  prepared  Schedule  D,  which 
exhibits  the  details  for  ten  years.  A  similar  analysis  might  well  be  made 
for  the  other  items,  but  the  value  of  the  comparison  depends  largely  upon  the 
classification  of  the  accounts  and  the  possibility  of  tracing  each  class  of 
expense  from  year  to  year. 

GENERAL  COMMENTS 

Some  general  considerations  may  properly  be  brought  out  at  the  close 
of  this  report. 

Quality  of  Work 

First,  as  to  the  explanations  that  may  be  given  for  the  increased  admin¬ 
istrative  expenses.  It  seems  to  us  that  there  is  abundant  evidence  to  show 
how  greatly  the  quality  of  the  office  work  has  been  improved  in  recent  years. 
We  have  no  personal  knowledge  of  actual  conditions  of  the  past,  but  if,  as 
we  are  informed,  much  of  the  present  practice  is  entirely  new,  we  cannot 
escape  the  conclusion  that  the  standard  has  been  notably  improved  in  several 
important  particulars.  It  appears  to  us  that  the  Union  is  now  in  a  position 
to  handle  largely  increased  business  with  but  slightly  increased  expense.  If 
income  be  taken  as  a  basis  of  comparison,  it  is  evident  that  the  Union  has 
made  a  favorable  showing  this  year  in  comparison  with  other  years. 

Women’s  Societies 

Finally,  we  cannot  leave  this  subject  without  noting  that  operating  as 
the  Union  does  with  large  revenues  from  the  affiliated  women’s  societies, 
any  complete  consideration  of  its  administrative  expense  should  properly 
include  the  women’s  societies  also.  They  collect  their  great  total  of  con¬ 
tributions  which  are  included  in  the  Union’s  annual  report  and  incur  con¬ 
siderable  expense  for  their  secretaries  and  assistants,  who  administer  the 
women’s  work.  Therefore,  when  any  comparison  is  made  of  expense 
against  the  total  work  appropriation,  or  the  total  outgo  of  the  Union,  it  must 
be  borne  in  mind  that,  in  addition  to  the  expense  on  the  Union’s  books,  there 
is  also  the  expense  of  the  women’s  societies  to  be  taken  into  consideration. 

While  the  statements  of  expense  based  solely  on  the  Union’s  accounts 
are,  to  this  extent,  misleading  because  the  women’s  expenses  are  omitted, 

11 


the  comparative  statistics  for  the  Union  are  significant  and  reliable  so  long  as 
the  proportion  of  income  from  the  women’s  societies  remains  about  constant. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  we  find  that  the  contributions  throughout  the  ten-year 
period  have  about  kept  pace  with  the  other  income  of  the  society,  the  fluctua¬ 
tions  being  sometimes  in  one  direction  and  sometimes  in  the  other.  The 
ratio  of  women’s  pledges  to  total  outgo  and  mission  appropriations  is  shown — 
year  by  year  on  Schedule  C. 

It  is  highly  desirable,  we  think,  in  future  annual  reports,  to  include  a 
complete  statement  of  the  expenses  of  the  women’s  societies,  and  their  full 
income,  as  well  as  the  amount  which  they  contribute  to  the  work  that  is 
carried  on  in  connection  with  the  Union. 

Very  respectfully, 

Harvey  S.  Chase  &  Company, 

Public  Accountants  and  Auditors. 


12 


Ameeican  Baptist  Missionary  Union.  Schedule 


CO 

T3f( 

HO 

CO 

■HH 

HO 

l-H 

I—t 

CD 

p 

P 

p 

p 

HO 

l-H 

l-H 

l> 

d 

00 

d 

d 

• 

»o 

t- 

<X 

o< 

CO 

GO 

CO 

Ob 

CN 

GO^ 

rH 

Ob 

HO 

HO 

p 

p 

Ob 

l> 

oo' 

ho' 

o' 

(X' 

t-' 

oi 

HO 

■I'H 

Ob 

o 

HO 

rH 

00 

00 

■rj' 

<x 

1— H 

l-H 

I— H 

€©■ 

* 

CD 

CO 

§g 

o 

l-H 

l—H 

Oi 

o< 

l-H 

»o 

rH 

p 

p 

p 

p 

Ob 

P 

o6 

o< 

ho’ 

l> 

d 

00 

d 

cd 

d 

o 

O 

HO 

CO 

o 

o 

o 

t- 

00 

o 

Ob 

CO 

CO^ 

l-H 

Hh 

<x 

o 

l-H 

HO 

HO 

*o 

oo' 

ho' 

co' 

l>' 

go' 

i>' 

Ob 

«5 

«0 

l-H 

t> 

l—H 

o 

z 

l—H 

Ob 

oo- 

»o 

l-H 

<x 

o 

rH 

HO 

Ob 

t- 

CO 

P 

p 

p 

(X 

rH 

p 

CD 

Ob 

cd 

d 

HO 

HO 

d 

d 

cd 

C) 

o< 

(X 

l-H 

o 

l> 

t- 

Ob 

CO 

Hi 

Ob 

lo 

00 

®i 

o< 

i> 

rH 

CO 

1>' 

of 

l-H 

oo' 

co' 

cd' 

oo' 

i> 

00 

*o 

<x 

l> 

o 

O^ 

l-H 

r-H 

Ob 

«©• 

m- 

lo 

CO 

GO 

00 

i> 

l—H 

o 

Tfl 

o 

GO 

p 

HO 

GO 

o< 

Tft 

CO 

to 

J> 

oi 

HO 

00 

(X 

cd 

cd 

d 

o 

Ob 

"If 

CO 

00 

<x 

t- 

o» 

CD 

Ob 

tP 

HO 

co^ 

GO^ 

p 

rH 

oT 

l-H 

t> 

■<af 

Ob' 

ho' 

of 

rH 

GO 

00 

00 

l-H 

rH 

00 

€©• 

o 

<3b 

o 

00 

. 

o 

CO 

Ob 

Oi 

p 

p 

rH 

• 

o 

l-H 

‘O 

CD 

CO 

cd 

d 

(X 

* 

hj3 

d 

00 

o 

»— ( 

CO 

CD 

CO 

00 

HO 

CO 

J> 

Ob 

r-H 

CO 

Ob 

co^ 

o 

Ob 

c» 

Ob' 

oo' 

go' 

oo' 

of 

d 

s 

?-H 

Ob 

HO 

GO 

l-H 

t- 

o 

€©• 

U 

(X 

CO 

CO 

l> 

o< 

p 

Ob 

p 

CO 

l-H 

P 

5 

l-H 

oo’ 

HO 

cd 

rH 

rH 

cd 

HO 

CO 

l-H 

o< 

l-H 

00 

00 

o 

00 

CJi 

O  Oi 

Ob 

o^ 

oo" 

o^ 

co' 

co' 

O 

<x' 

c» 

co' 

p 

of 

of 

HO 

00 

o 

l-H 

GO 

GO 

GO 

l-H 

l-H 

t- 

t  R 

€6- 

CO 

(X 

to 

o 

HO 

Ob 

rr'l 

»o 

<x 

l-H 

p 

p 

o< 

hJH 

r*i 

CO 

00 

d 

rH 

d 

HO 

d 

d 

S 

C) 

CO 

HO 

CO 

oo 

HO 

rJH 

HO 

Ob 

00 

*\ 

co^ 

00^ 

cx 

CO 

0s 

p 

p 

CO 

"an' 

•o' 

*o' 

HO 

O^ 

l-H 

of 

Ob 

i> 

<x 

CO 

00 

<1 

CO 

l-H 

CO 

H  i 

m- 

ce- 

CO 

t~ 

l-H 

W5 

o 

HO 

l-H 

Ob 

r^ 

(X 

p 

p 

p 

■Hf; 

i> 

Q  k 

HO 

l> 

CO 

d 

l-H 

d 

cd 

c£ 

hH 

Peh 

o 

Ob 

Ob 

CO 

o 

CD 

o< 

r-H 

Ob 

T~i 

®1 

ho" 

co^ 

co' 

o 

oo' 

00 

o 

00 

#k 

HO 

p^ 

r-H 

p 

hJh" 

HH 

00 

CO 

l-H 

O^ 

CO 

CO 

l-H 

CO 

CO 

CO- 

Ob 

l> 

Ob 

HO 

M 

l-H 

p 

l-H 

00 

P 

rH 

u 

Ob 

cd 

<x 

d 

d 

Cb 

00 

HO 

t- 

Ob 

Ob 

r-H 

<x 

p 

p 

o' 

co' 

!>' 

oo' 

co' 

CO 

pH 

Tf< 

rH 

■rJH 

CO 

l-H 

l-H 

CO 

m- 

Oi 

(X 

CO 

Hj< 

l-H 

Ob 

HO 

l-H 

HO 

Cb 

00 

00 

GO 

d 

00 

00 

o 

o 

Ob 

Ob 

CO 

■hJH 

Ob 

co^ 

co^ 

p 

l-H 

p 

p^ 

o' 

co' 

of 

l-H 

of 

co' 

. 

HO 

CO 

rH 

'Tf* 

CO 

€©■ 

l-H 

■e 

§• 

Ph 

(h 

o 

«HH 

.a 

o 

4- 

) 

-S3 

.a 

-C 

cd 

X) 

0) 

’o 

o 

Q 

T? 

P 

Vi 

a 

P 

;o 

d 

w 

p 

n 

o 

cy 

441 

P 

p 

* 

Vi 

p 

Vi 

o 

C 

) 

p 

d 

a 

o 

cn 

P 

p 

p 

i2 

M 

H 

1 

•  -4 
4.4 

tn 

a 

VI 

.<-> 

a 

0) 

O 

PQ 

a 

o 

ptH 

«h-h 

•  rH 

o 

p 

o 

-M 

8 

p 

O 

P 

np 

o 
.  ^ 

■*^ 

d 

a 

<v 

•  -H 

o 

a 

to 

a 

VI 

(U 

>■ 

4-> 

’3 

fH 

«+H 

c/5 

-4-J 

4.J 

t-l 

(V 

cu 

o 

‘o 

0) 

S' 

'.3 

1— I 

OJ 

-p 

'•--a 

H 

* 

o 

Q 

a 

l-H 

< 

•  r-H 

o 

pH 

a 

m 

fH 

4.4 

o 

o 

f-H 

*o 

o 

Of 

*o 

Of 

X 

X 

fO 

*fS 

o 

CO 

lO 

q 

q 

q 

X 

q 

q 

q 

m 

;d 

l-^ 

cd 

w 

x 

X 

p 

P 

rH 

P 

* 

CO 

o< 

X 

i- 

X 

X 

X 

J> 

X 

c:> 

Cs 

CD^ 

l> 

*-o 

I— 1 

a 

lO 

mh 

x^ 

x^ 

>p 

05 

‘O 

CO*" 

p 

X 

P 

x" 

cd 

p 

x" 

X 

3 

r— ^ 

Tf« 

X 

Of 

X 

p 

lO 

X 

X 

*0 

1-^ 

1-H 

X 

X 

MM 

1-^ 

09 

€©^ 

€©• 

43 

u 

C/3 

I-O 

Of 

X 

X 

X 

Of 

Hf 

X 

*0 

‘-0 

CO 

lO 

CO 

X 

q 

X 

X 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

o6 

oi 

o’ 

x’ 

x’ 

GO 

cd 

X 

*d 

P 

P 

P 

d 

■rt' 

o 

o^ 

X 

i> 

X 

CO 

X 

o 

X 

o 

o 

X 

nO 

05 

*£© 

o^ 

o 

q^ 

t~ 

q^ 

■q 

■q 

X 

X^ 

l> 

•o' 

x" 

of 

p 

P 

x" 

P 

P 

o" 

P 

x" 

O 

X 

Of 

1-H 

Of 

s 

‘-0 

a 

1-H 

X 

€©■ 

o©- 

09 

i> 

CO 

X 

Of 

X 

X 

o 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

0 

i> 

o 

't 

X 

q 

X 

q 

X 

q 

q 

MM 

• 

CO 

cd 

o’ 

cd 

Of 

Of 

p 

P 

P 

P 

d 

P 

P 

*o 

o 

05 

b- 

X 

Of 

X 

rH 

*0 

X 

o 

l—H 

o^ 

*o^ 

co^ 

X 

q^ 

X^ 

rH 

q 

-q 

q 

q 

05 

>X«J 

go' 

go" 

cd 

1-H 

o" 

cd 

X 

P 

1-H 

P 

x" 

x" 

rH 

X 

X 

Of 

1-H 

Of 

Tfl 

Of 

X 

X 

X 

Oi 

€©- 

1-H 

1-H 

X 

X 

«©• 

€©• 

o 

J> 

Of 

X 

X 

X 

Of 

X 

I-O 

X 

X 

CO 

o^ 

cq 

Of 

q 

1-H 

q 

1-H 

q 

X 

q 

q 

, 

o’ 

p 

p 

p 

d 

Of 

*d 

cd 

GO 

d 

x 

GO 

P 

CO 

CO 

o 

05 

Of 

X 

X 

o 

X 

rfi 

Of 

X 

X 

o 

r^ 

co^ 

o^ 

o^ 

x^ 

X 

x^ 

X 

q 

X 

05 

>WJ 

CO 

co" 

p 

x' 

x' 

x" 

1-H 

P 

x" 

X 

X 

X 

Of 

o 

Of 

X 

X 

I-H 

X 

00 

1-H 

1-H 

X 

•s©- 

o 

05 

*o 

05 

o 

fO 

X 

*o 

X 

Of 

X 

X 

Of 

1-H 

X 

q 

'^. 

q 

q 

X 

X 

q 

X 

q 

X 

t> 

, 

cd 

t=h 

d 

x’ 

1-H 

P 

d 

cd 

d 

rH 

P 

X 

GO 

‘C) 

i> 

o 

o 

»o 

X 

Of 

X 

Of 

X 

c 

X 

1-H 

X 

o 

(O 

co_^ 

05^ 

*o 

Of 

q 

X 

X 

x_ 

q 

X 

O 

Oi 

»> 

cd 

x" 

05 

p 

•o" 

p' 

d" 

p 

x" 

rH 

CO 

1— < 

X 

Of 

1-H 

o 

Of 

X 

1-H 

I-H 

o 

H 

P 

I-H 

X 

t- 

€©• 

m- 

€©■ 

09 

O 

Oi 

*-o 

CO 

05 

»o 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

o 

05 

o^ 

t-H 

q 

X 

q 

q 

X 

q 

q 

X 

O 

*o 

r-^ 

d 

x’ 

*d 

d 

d 

1— i 

GO 

d 

X 

*d 

P 

• 

rv. 

cc 

‘O 

05 

05 

f> 

o 

mH 

1-4 

Of 

f  q; 

X 

X 

*0 

PS 

P 

o 

Oi 

o 

Oi 

nP 

Ci 

o 

cc"' 

of 

x^ 

p 

cc 

p 

t> 

x" 

p 

q_ 

P 

l> 

*d 

x^ 

x" 

q 

P 

x" 

q 

*0" 

P 

CO 

X 

Of 

1-H 

X 

Of 

1-H 

o 

Of 

rH 

6©- 

o 

H 

1 

o 

t- 

m- 

€©■ 

X 

f> 

w 

03 

o 

Ci 

■M 

f-H 

05 

rH 

X 

O 

j> 

X 

X 

w 

'^. 

CO 

q 

1-H 

q 

q 

I-H 

1-H 

q 

X 

q 

X 

q 

l-H 

§ 

Oq 

©0 

cd 

05 

d 

P 

P 

d 

X 

X 

P 

Of 

d 

X 

d 

s 

w 

H 

K 

*o 

05 

05 

Of 

CO 

Of 

*o 

X 

X 

X 

*0 

H 

03 

Q 

<3^ 

P 

CS 

00^ 

of 

GO 

lO 

05^ 

x" 

X 

1-H 

Of 

i> 

x" 

1-H 

f> 

x" 

o 

o" 

X 

q_ 

P 

Of 

q^ 

P 

1-H 

q 

x" 

X 

x^ 

o" 

1-- 

mm 

q 

x' 

Of 

|h 

CO 

€©• 

1-H 

X 

X 

PU 

w 

H 

c/3 

s 

09- 

05 

05 

CO 

1— H 

o 

o 

X 

X 

-s©- 

1-H 

o 

-s©- 

rH 

X 

Of 

Q 

P 

hH 

P 

X 

X 

X 

X 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

c 

1-H 

5r 

o 

1902. 

cd 

GO 

d 

cd 

d 

d 

cd 

X 

d 

X 

X 

0 

P 

Fh 

d 

J> 

p 

to 

CO 

i> 

o 

x_^ 

i> 

o^ 

of 

X 

x" 

o 

1-H 

x" 

X 

x^ 

x" 

x^ 

x" 

rH 

x" 

x^ 

x" 

*0 

X 

rH 

X 

x^ 

p 

X 

-H 

P 

pH 

H 

C/3 

C/3 

<5l 

P 

U 

o^ 

CO 

X 

Of 

1-H 

G©- 

Of 

o 

1-H 

1-H 

*o 

Of 

X 

X 

€©■ 

■6©- 

<3 

Oi 

Of 

i> 

1-H 

’f* 

CO 

o 

o 

0 

0 

T-^ 

rM 

*-q 

q 

q 

q 

X 

q 

X 

X 

I-H 

q 

Of 

y^ 

cd 

cd 

CO 

X 

d 

1-H 

P 

P 

d 

1-H 

Of 

P 

p 

Q) 

t^ 

CO 

X 

05 

Of 

o 

Of 

X 

rH 

Of 

X 

rf* 

X 

05 

c« 

o^ 

r— 1 

q^ 

q_ 

q^ 

q_ 

q_ 

1-H 

1-H 

Iq 

q 

co" 

p 

of 

1-H 

of 

P 

o' 

x" 

x" 

x" 

P 

P 

x" 

€©■ 

X 

Of 

1-H 

t- 

1-H 

X 

l" 

i> 

t> 

X 

CO 

€©■ 

£©• 

fO 

«©• 

€©■ 

€©■ 

t- 

X 

Of 

1-H 

*o 

X 

X 

1-H 

fo 

rfl 

io 

X 

Of 

X 

X 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

rs 

GO 

ol 

d 

GO 

p 

P 

GO 

X 

P 

d 

P 

p 

I-H 

X 

CO 

1-H 

o 

>0 

X 

Of 

X 

0 

•0 

-f 

05 

o^ 

x^ 

Of^ 

Of 

1-H 

o 

q 

q 

x^ 

q_ 

■M 

cd 

oi 

o" 

o" 

o" 

P 

x" 

d 

x" 

o" 

x" 

cd 

rH 

€©■ 

X 

Of 

1-H 

X 

Of 

X 

rH 

X 

5-0 

1-H 

€©5 

09 

‘O 

*0 

1-H 

€©• 

f  . 

69 

^  • 
c3  . 

«c 

05  . 

P 

>H  . 

X 

.2i 

S 

K. 

Q 

'5 

r2 

'  o 

33 

<3 

w 

C. 

•x> 

05 

75 

05 

*  ^ 
HM 

~C3 

.2  • 

c/: 

,22  o 

§ 

O 

c/3 

CJ 

IrH  X 

>4 

s 

05 

05 

05 

=C 

|M 

Cc 

05 

fl 

s 

►-—I 

.Si 

*E 

c3 

e 

o  9 

C 

X 

<V 

C^ 

iB 

w 

05 

X 

pp 

o 

05 

(h 

o 

«HM 

c/3 

g 

H 

^  0^ 

73  ^ 

§C^ 

05 

a 

0 

a 

0 

0 

c 

I-H 

«+- 

H-i 

0 

'V 

(M 

i 

a 

O 

Cm 

X 

05 

S 

o 

CL> 

/M 

•S2  be 

0 

C:5 

P 

0 

w 

o 

C5 

s: 

>--1 

d 

CSi 

CJ 

-M 

a; 

m 

o 

05 

5- 

w 

3 

•w 

X 

a 

c/3 

o 

cC  G 

’a"? 

■S4 

O* 

6 

en-c 

0 

73 

05 

cs 

05 

E 

4-) 

e 

o 

■fci 

MO 

o 

oS 

(-< 

0) 

'E 

H-d 

cn 

O 

O 

05 

X 

CJ 

E 

a> 

05 

h 

0) 

4—1 

MO 

a 

•Mi 

E 

c/3 

•  ^ 

MO 

E 

MO 

o 

2  ^ 

/M 

s 

MO 

•Mi 

73 

05 

05 

y. 

•  »M 

05 

CC 

05 

* 

05 

CC 

05 

p 

C 

W 

o 

hH 

Q 

p 

-^3 

P 

W 

c 

Q 

o 

0) 

3 

’S 

u 

C/D 


Oi  05 
O  CO 

r-H 


CO 


00  O  CO 

o  1-^ 
S  CO  oi 


CO 

O  CS^ 

“  2 


*o 

t- 


o  o 

i> 

cd 


CO  ‘o 
05  <3^ 

o  t}5 

I-I 


05  CO 

o  t> 
o  cd 

Oi  T— I 


C3i  CO 
O  05 

S  ‘d 


00 

I  s 


§  2 


o 

12; 


i? 

o 


H 

CQ 

R 

PM 


*o 

CO 

00 

O 

hJH 

o 

cq 

p 

O) 

oi 

©i 

d 

1^ 

pH 

fH 

©< 

pH 

o 

H 

CO 

o 

»© 

o 

GO 

©/ 

GO 

GO 

O 

05 

PH 

pH 

pH 

d 

©^ 

rH 

Q 

>4 

CO 

pH 

05 

o 

io 

00 

cq 

GO 

05 

oi 

©i 

G 

40 

s 

PH 

pH 

pH 

pH 

f-H 

O 

o 

ed 

O 

QO 

©^ 

©? 

GO 

pH 

P 

1-H 

s 

05 

PH 

cd 

pH 

cd 

pH 

05 

I-H 

<6 

J-H 

o 

H 


^  « 

05  ©:j 

pH  r— I 


CO  CO 

i>  *o 


05  ©J 
■M  pH 


»0  05 

i>  CO 

t-  »d 


J> 

i> 


»o 

»© 


1>  CO 


cc 

0) 

•  pal 

o 

d 

tJD 


73 

01 

o 

d 

01 

o 

Q 

54-1 

o 

pb 

a 


73 

0)  ■  a 

I  §>1 

iS  d  g 

^ 

d  d 

■Hi  -M 

O  O  O 

H  H  a 


<U  O  03 

g  g  g 

1 1 1 

WWW 

(13  03  0) 

a  a  a 

O  O  o 

W  K  W 

ap-i  iPH  S+-I 

o  o  o 

o  0  01 

o  o  o 

•  i-H  •  ^  •  f«H 

•e  -s  -e 

Dh  a  Sh 

O  O  o 

!h  fH 

WWW 


73 

01 

o 

•  pH 

-t-H 

cS 

•  p— 1 

Mh 

w 

o 

D- 
Oh 

*=i 

*<  o 

•  ^ 

OJ 

C» 

^  p 

-S 

^  03 

a 

^  & 


03 

a 

o 

o 

03 

pO 


T3 

01 

d 


t-c 

w 

03 

a 

o 

a 


01 

o 

•  ^ 

a 

a 

o 

£ 


o 

H 

o 

H 


•  CO 

3S’  06 

o 

05 


CO 


‘S'  so 

§  s 


§  2 

05  CO 

PH  pH 


o 

05  00 


cd  ^ 

C35  00 

PH  I-H 


40 

05 

o 

o 

a 

z 

00 

o 

©/ 

p 

w 

o 

05 

cd 

»d 

d 

05 

00 

PH 

P-H 

pH 

pH 

M 

PH 

pH 

s 

O 

05  o' 

PH  ©( 


C/D 

s 

H 

S 

O 

o 

0) 

C/D 

a 

C/D 

o 

o 

o 

H 

o 


73 

03 


03 

•  pH 

o 

o 

ai 

^73 

"ol 

03 

a 

o 

a 

o 

W-i 

3 


01 

.2 

'■a 

o 

Ph 

o 

Mh 

w 


Proportion  of  Gifts  from  Women’s  Societies  to  Mission  Appropriations . 21.77  24.73  22.34  22,63  22.14  25.15  19.14  21.86  22.06  22.09 


American  Baptist  Missionary  Union.  Schedule 


CO 

■e 

S. 

O) 

a> 

ja 


W 

< 

W 

z 

O 

O 

CD 

h-3 

hH 

<! 

H 

Q 


OSO‘0'-'C<OSNO^Ni©0®‘0 

gjoo‘OoO'^o»oo‘or'.»oiN.-^«o 

oo6o6oo6ot^o6o6o6'^w'o5«oo» 

OCO^^CCN'-'IO^OMOC^C^'O 
1-H  ^  Oi  C30  O  ^  •©t'.  CO.—' 

t>r  co' 

•» 


t^o©eocoO-Ht^T}<T}«icoov2 

Qp-coo©wi>..^i'_o.^«:>coqTj'_co“ 

o  00  ©'  ■^'  o  os  •-<  cd  ^  ©  oi  ^ 
OsosTrt^^Ocoosioosio^osoot? 
1-H  05  O  *o  ^  ©© 


(N 


.ooo05©©.^t^©oc^'^o©2 

t^Tl<5OO5©^q00Wt^qt';«M'* 

2  c<i  r>.*  .-<■  T»<  05*  ..i*  t'l  ©  CO  ©  ©  05  (N  * 

2  CO -H  00  05  ©® 

N  o  ©.^©^.^_  "<*©  05*^ 

fs.  1— j  1-^  ^  ^ 

M 

..^OOOC^^^05T^^O^^<N©0®2 

©t^Ttio05qqco©05q«t'.T}''q 

2©c.^o6co'^''0©t^0505^o4cd2 

2O05'-it^C00505C^'-i''i‘t^<-iC0S 

©__o  "o  <-1  ©  ©  <N  2. 

^  ^ 


..^iOC^<N©©.-iO®t-'-i(Nc^© 

if505Tti©^©©05ro'-;©'-;qTj<'^ 

2  05  ,-(■  00  •^’  ©  05  00  (N  05  q  t'.*  o6 

®»-<00^NC^O00  (N '-' 00 1>.  © 
'^00oOC0©'-'t^  (N©'^ 

C0*.-<rH  .-T  <N 

«» 

..j;.-it'.oooo«w©Mq»qTj'Tj'q 

2  00  rH  ©  ©"  N  co’ ©  cd  (N  00 

®^00l^00O<Nl>T-|.^C0©O.-t.-i© 

O  05  05  <N  05_'-i '-'  ©^©  (N  ® 

CO  ^  ^ 


o 

(N 

CO 

q. 


o 

© 

© 

© 

©_ 

(N 


o 

© 

h-' 

rf 

05 


•-H  o  o  ^  ^  ^  o 

W  «  ©  N  •  ©  •  •-;  t>; 
C'.’  ■  ©  o 

-^cot^o  .'^  »© 

C>.  .  Ol  ]  O)  w 


_iOO©©©0.^''f 

op©q'-<o4qq© 

idcdo6o©^'c5©t^ 

OC^©t^Q0©©-»« 

©'-<'-i00COC^NO5t}' 


■  eoooqeo© 
•  q©qM''«j 

■  ci  '!<  C> 

■©©•^©co 
^  ©  ^  1-^  w 

’.-T  c» 


©30© 

^  q©© 
ed  w  C'i  cd 

O'-!©© 
f„  1-H  1-1  •rl< 


.©O 
■  ro 

•  h,*  TJ» 

•  ©rj< 


•© 

•t^ 

!<» 

Q 


© 

<-i  ©o©  • 

•o»o 

•  ••••••••  oo  •  •  •  • 

© 

Cl©©©  . 

•  O  ”  © 

•  ••••••••  •  •  •  • 

id'^od 

•  *«••••••  •  •  •  • 

© 

ci©Tj<r»  • 

OCItC 

. O)  , 

© 

©  fO  ; 

;  ©© 

© 

n 

a> 


N 

Cl 

00 

CO 

o 


CO 

© 

Cl 

© 


!>; 

CO 

Cl 

© 


— H 

t>. 

© 

■  Ot»<  . 

•q©  • 

•  oo 

•  Ot'; 

•  • 

:  :g 

'|H 
■  <-4 

05 

CO 

■  ©05  ■ 

;dd 

•  • 

•  ^ 

© 

Cl  3  ■ 

oci 

.  E? 

.  1— 1 

© 

Cl 

.Cl ©  ; 

; 

•  • 

•  Cl 

© 

I..* 

«• 

© 

•  •  ©  • 

•  •  • 

•© 

•  'T  • 

•  ..H 

s 

© 

•  i>.  . 

•  •  • 

•  © 

•  ©  • 

;© 

©’ 

:  : 

•  •  • 

■© 

^d 

o 

© 

Cl 

•  -S?  • 

.  © 

•2  • 

.© 

|H 

© 

Cl 

•  •<=^.  • 

.  Tf 

.  ^  . 

.Cl 

a 

<v 

.©«©© 
©  fH  3  q  q 

o 

© 

> 

2  05  ©  ©  ci 

!>.’ 

•  p4 

bfl 

05  Cl -.Jt  CIO 

N. 

”  3_©  «  © 

3 

73 

C55 

Cl  .H 

O 

05 

1 

ooci© 

© 

• 

O 

Cl  ©  ©  ©  q 

3 

CiQ 

o 

q  o6  ..i  ©  ci 

© 

CD 

05 

®©©©© 

© 

2 

■hh 

”ci«q© 

© 

W 

»s 

Cl 

Ph 

a 

CO 

(N 


<ci©©o©t^ 

5  .-I  r-l  o  Cl  ©  © 
I  (N  lO  Cl  rl< 


© 

q 

© 

1.H 

t'._ 

Cl 


00 

© 


CO 


CO 


•  ©© 
©q 

■  05  © 

;o© 

©© 


© 


o©o 

ooo 

dci© 

©Cl 


© 

© 

© 


© 

© 

Cl 

© 


.©o 

2©d 

©Cl  © 
Cl 

Cl 


© 

© 

o 

Cl 


Cl 

© 

©  05  ©  O  • 

•  •••«••••  QQ 

© 

■.S'  o©  • 

1.^ 

•  •••••••• 

ci 

3 

-H'diNd  ; 

ci 

•••••••••  n*? 

. © 

O 

1— < 1 1  ©  . 

ts. 

© 

©Cl  ©  . 

■  ■  1 . © 

•  o© 

.  OtH 

;d© 

.©Cl 


•o 
•© 
.’ci 
.  © 


Cl 


© 


© 

c. 

00 


o 

© 

d 

« 

CO 


© 

s 

q. 

Cl 


©3 

© 

,  00 

Cl 

pd© 

© 

pci3 

2”t- 

© 

Cl 

«»  ^ 

© 

q 

©‘ 


O  Tj<00© 

Tf  ©  q  ©  ^ 
©■  ©  .-I  TjJ  d 

o©© 


©  ©  M'-' 


bo 
C 

•4^ 

s: 
be 

hJ 

O  73 

a 

o  o 
S  o 

T3  O 

73  C3 

EO 

§■§ 

•d’fH 

o 

•4^ 

c 

K>s 


73 

.2 

3 

CS 

o 

'd 

c 

cd 


>> 

t-l 

<v 

d 

o 

4-» 

02 

TO 

d 

d 

be 

d 


73 

.2 

'Sd'S 

0.03  — 

3  E 
0^*1 
^  *- 

S 

TO  03  .a 

“Q 

03”  t-i 

O.S  d 
•S’d'^ 

.TO ’3  »  S 

“  d  .  d  d 
-  Jr  K>3  03  03  w 
bD.D<73<13 

g^.EoWWSW 

—I  03  73  2  >>o  ffi  d”  d 

'S'*5.g”^-gi'£W.o 

0^2.^  ..ro*5Cn3  "d 

3  2*S^  03  2  tn<32  be  o 

S  i:;  o  2  - 


tn 

mO^W  S  d  OT  d— -s.is 

Oa3^c^*«Q3c0303«OCt.i 

q,  Eh  H  m  O  H  Eh  H  <3  H 


|5.i  I  SSis.S  S  «  Sl3|  nil  ||i  lls 

H  )SEHHH>?OOCSP^^SoHOfeoWH^-3>^<S 


